Talk:Henry VIII

What to call Monarchs--i.e. article title format

I'm assuming that monarchs will be referred with the country in the title, that is Henry IV of England as opposed to Henry IV, which would need disambiguation (is that really a word?). I'll go ahead and use that format and fix the links I find, unless someone has an objection. Aleta Curry 22:04, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

I think we eventually agreed to name these all Henry VIII (England), etc. J. Noel Chiappa 14:03, 11 April 2008 (CDT)

No we agreed only when it was necessary. There is only one Henry VIII and so the England part is superfluous. Richard Jensen 14:30, 11 April 2008 (CDT)

I'm all for picking something clear as far as the names of royalty are concerned, but I also think it would be desirable to figure out a naming scheme that avoids anachronism. For example, even though he was technically king of England, it would be strange to name our article on the Angevin king Henry II "Henry II (England)" because at his accession, most of his territory was in modern-day France. Perhaps it would be preferable to go with royal household instead-- i.e. Henry VIII (house of Tudor). This is far from a perfect solution-- it's somewhat patriarchal-- but it is clear and un-anachronistic. Rather than engaging Richard on his particular question-- naming each article by realm or family or whatever from the start or not-- I am going to refrain until Anthony gets the 'Naming Convention' proposal written up and we have our vote (I am guessing that it will break down along deterministic v. non-deterministic lines). Brian P. Long 15:34, 11 April 2008 (CDT)

I think "Henry VIII (House of Tudor)" is clunky. If we go down that road, I'd much prefer "Henry VIII (Tudor)". J. Noel Chiappa 13:29, 17 May 2008 (CDT)

is there any opposition to renaming this Henry VIII ? That is what the draft on naming conventions calls for. Richard Jensen 08:49, 17 May 2008 (CDT)

Henry VIII is fine. What is the situation when we have multiple Henrys? In that situation, How do we work it out? (There were several kings of france called Henry, I think) Denis Cavanagh 11:03, 17 May 2008 (CDT)

Once articles are checklisted, moving them is a pain. Since naming is still up in the air, it would be good to avoid a second rename. But I'm not bothered particularly if someone feels that absolutely have to rename this through some intermediate name. J. Noel Chiappa 13:29, 17 May 2008 (CDT)

There is only one person in history named Henry VIII, so we have no overlap. There are several kings named Henry II (that is, after we translate their name into English--like the Polish Henryk II), so Henry II (England) works for me. I dislike "Henry II of England" because students will assume that was his name or title, and it was neither. Can we have a constable or expert do the moving. Last time I tried it we lost the throne.Richard Jensen 13:35, 17 May 2008 (CDT)

Done. Fee: 5 CZ-credits... :-) J. Noel Chiappa 14:37, 17 May 2008 (CDT)

hey that's terrific...you get one free bibliography or 10 random book titles! Reminds me of teaching in Chicago one winter. Night class 6pm-9om. HEAVY snowstorm. Two students come in about 7pm covered with snow--welcome! I said, we thought you wouldn't make it. They tell about subways stopped in the snow. Then the ask don't we get a reward???? I agreed: OK, you can have 5 free typos on your next paper.  :) (true story) Richard Jensen 14:40, 17 May 2008 (CDT)

Oh my giddy aunt! And this is okay because--WHY?? Is that the humanities equivalent of "Ruby programming language" (and by the way is that to be written with all caps "Ruby Programming Language"?) My head hurts!

Aleta Curry 20:16, 18 May 2008 (CDT)

Where there isn't another Henry VIII its okay. We run into problems when we call kings things such as Richard I of England, despite the fact that that particular king spoke very little (if any) English, spent 6 months of his 10 year reign in England, and owned huge portions of France... Kinda misleading! Denis Cavanagh 20:20, 18 May 2008 (CDT)

You expect this all to make sense? What an optimist! J. Noel Chiappa 20:25, 18 May 2008 (CDT)

Er...well, no, Den, if this is *only* about disambiguation, then Richard I is never a problem using the above logic, because there's only one, despite the fact that people like me call him Richard the Lionheart. I think? Right? Where's the aspirin? Aleta Curry 20:31, 18 May 2008 (CDT)

Improvements

This will become a major article, so I hope people can pitch in. I added a bibliography, added some small details and made a few small editorial tweaks. Richard Jensen 18:42, 17 May 2008 (CDT)